God rest their souls. May they be at peace in His joyful heaven .. free from violence and pain.
How can Rusty Yates be ACCEPTING of his 5 children being murdered?? And he's 'supportive' of her?? He's gotta have screws loose, too.
Posted on 07/26/2006 9:35:01 AM PDT by cajunman
HOUSTON -- Jurors reached a verdict in Andrea Yates' murder retrial Wednesday morning. The jury's decision will be announced at about 11:25 a.m. KPRC and Click2Houston will air the verdict live.
After deliberating nearly 11 hours, jurors returned for a third day Wednesday to determine if she was legally insane when she drowned her five children in the bathtub.
Before court ended Tuesday, the jury of six men and six women asked to review the state's definition of insanity: that someone, because of a severe mental illness, does not know a crime he is committing is wrong.
State District Judge Belinda Hill said jurors, who were sequestered for the second night, , could see the definition Wednesday morning.
Jurors have already deliberated longer than the nearly four hours it took a first jury, which convicted her in 2002. That conviction was overturned on appeal last year.
Yates, 42, has pleaded innocent by reason of insanity. She is charged in only three of the deaths, which is common in cases involving multiple slayings.
As court was to end Tuesday, jurors asked for one more hour to deliberate. But then the panel immediately passed another note rescinding that request. Hill quoted the note, which read, "We need some sleep," prompting laughs from those in the courtroom.
The jury earlier asked to review the videotape of Yates' July 2001 evaluation by Dr. Phillip Resnick, a forensic psychiatrist who testified for the defense that she did not know killing the children was wrong because she was trying to save them from hell.
Resnick told jurors that Yates was delusional and believed 6-month-old Mary, 2-year-old Luke, 3-year-old Paul, 5-year-old John and 7-year-old Noah would grow up to be criminals because she had ruined them.
Jurors later asked to review Yates' November 2001 videotaped evaluation by Dr. Park Dietz, the state's expert witness whose testimony led an appeals court to overturn Yates' 2002 capital murder conviction last year.
Dietz, a forensic psychiatrist, testified in her first trial that an episode of the television series "Law & Order" depicted a woman who was acquitted by reason of insanity after drowning her children. But no such episode existed. The judge barred attorneys in this trial from mentioning that issue.
On Tuesday, after jurors asked for the trial transcript involving defense attorney George Parnham's questioning of Dietz about the definition of obsessions, the judge brought the jury back into the courtroom.
The court reporter then read the brief transcript, in which Dietz said Yates "believed that Satan was at least present. She felt or sensed the presence." Dietz had testified that Yates' thoughts about harming her children were an obsession and a symptom of severe depression -- not psychosis.
Earlier Tuesday, jurors reviewed the slide presentation of the state's key expert witness, Dr. Michael Welner, a forensic psychiatrist who evaluated Yates in May. He testified that she did not kill her children to save them from hell as she claims, but because she was overwhelmed and felt inadequate as a mother.
Welner told jurors that although Yates was psychotic on the day of the June 2001 drownings, he found 60 examples of how she knew it was wrong to kill them.
If Yates is found innocent by reason of insanity, she will be committed to a state mental hospital, with periodic hearings before a judge to determine whether she should be released -- although by law, jurors are not allowed to be told that.
Yates will be sentenced to life in prison if convicted of capital murder.
A capital murder conviction in Texas carries either life in prison or the death penalty. Prosecutors could not seek death this time because the first trial's jurors sentenced her to life in prison, and authorities found no new evidence
I wonder when the first case, using insanity as a defense, occurred??
The laws need to be re-written to stipulate; guilty but with penalties to include; lifetime pyschiatric incarceration when insanity is part of the defense.
I so agree with you. He should be serving time for aiding and abetting (or some such thing...)
That just sucks....what is wrong with people now a days....
Becky
All twelve of them?
How you reached that conclusion, I have no idea... jerk.
You think my opinion is repugnant?
Yes.
Deal with it.
I did... Comment #44 Removed by Moderator
Well sure she is insane, but so was Ted Bundy and any number of long-since executed murderers.
Where do we draw the line?
Rusty Yates is disgusting.
There is some truth to your comment.... Also, if it was a man sentenced to life in prison for killing his five kids and a comment was made about how the inmates deal with people who hurt/kill children, it would be totally acceptable.
Remember they only tried her for the death of three of the children. Thus should she be released or should the DA decides to they can try her for the remaining two children. Not sure how another trial would play with the verdict of not guilty by insanity in this one.
I think she was insane at the time. I also think she is guilty.
God rest their souls. May they be at peace in His joyful heaven .. free from violence and pain.
How can Rusty Yates be ACCEPTING of his 5 children being murdered?? And he's 'supportive' of her?? He's gotta have screws loose, too.
This woman was obviously sick to do something so horrific. That people can't understand that or have some other emotional reason to hate her is not a reason to fry her.
That's a good one! I think that should be an option, where once she is "treated" then she begins to serve her sentence, thus hopefully never, ever being free again.
No she won't. She will be on psychotropic drugs for the rest of her life.
Her physical location is beside the point, whether a state hospital or state prison. Her mental state will likely never improve.
Interesting that her ex huband, Rusty was there showing his support. We are a sick society..
sw
How many of her children was she on trial for killing? I thought it was not all 5. Does this mean the state can now try her for the remaining children, hoping for a guilty verdict from a second jury?
Even if they lock her in an asylum, she might be able to pull it off... I can't imagine why she wouldn't want to be dead right now.
the truth is they are her dead drowned children. calling them unfortunate is sugar coating the truth. this sick woman murdered her babies.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.